Tessera
Folgen

Ramiro Álvarez Ugarte

@ramiroau.bsky.social

@celeup.bsky.social / UBA / IIP-UNSAM. Con law & theory, social movements, Internet governance --- JSD/LLM @columbiauniversity.bsky.social . EC @icon-s-argentina.bsky.social https://ramiroau.github.io/

107 Posts262 Follower299 Folgt
Steve Vladeck@stevevladeck.bsky.social · 3mo ago

Yesterday morning, I wrote about how #SCOTUS keeps *choosing* to inject itself into politics. Then, the Court did it again last night—clearing the way for Alabama to re-draw its maps *this* cycle, even though it allowed Alabama to use old, unlawful maps in 2022: www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25p...

Steve Vladeck@stevevladeck.bsky.social · 3mo ago

Over at “One First,” I wrote about how the redistricting chaos we’re seeing in Alabama, Florida, Louisiana, Tennessee, and Virginia is something #SCOTUS *chose,* and how it belies both the entire purpose of the “Purcell principle” and the Court’s claim that it’s staying out of the political process:

Daphne Keller@daphnek.bsky.social · 4mo ago

I recently heard someone say that the WSJ will fight state pressure more than, say, CBS ever did because Murdoch knows the WSJ has to be seen as a credible information source by businesses. So much to unpack in that. But… whaddya know, here’s @wsj.com fighting and winning.

Jake Tapper, long-suffering Philly sports fan@jaketapper.bsky.social · 4mo ago

Judge dismisses Trump defamation suit against the WSJ: “Because President Trump has not plausibly alleged that Defendants published the Article with actual malice, both Counts must be dismissed.” storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.us...

Samuel Moyn@samuelmoyn.bsky.social · 4mo ago

Yeah, but it's rare that "engagement" is available in one form only. To that extent, we need deliberation (hidden or open) about which forms are available, and how they compare or contrast, including the collateral effects of each. Which is what these posts are calling for-not sitting in silence.

Ramiro Álvarez Ugarte@ramiroau.bsky.social · 6mo ago

New on the Internet Policy Review, and I think also timely: policyreview.info/articles/ana... I argue that threats of regulation is a fundamental mechanism of governance in the Internet industry (and beyond)

Ruling by bullying: Threats of regulation as an internet governance device

Governments around the world pressure internet companies to get informally what they cannot obtain through formal regulatory channels, a pervasive mechanism of governance that challenges fundamental d...

policyreview.info

Ramiro Álvarez Ugarte@ramiroau.bsky.social · 9mo ago

Why the voluntary approach to business and human rights sucks (and a few things that can be done about it). www.tandfonline.com/eprint/KNN8T...

Bad cover versions of law: on the inherent limits of voluntary human rights obligations, as applied to internet companies doing content moderation

This article argues that human rights impact assessments (HRIAs) in the technological sector are inherently handicapped by the voluntary approach to business and human rights in which they are conc...

tandfonline.com

Daphne Keller@daphnek.bsky.social · 11mo ago

When people first hear about "jawboning" -- meaning government pressure to suppress speech through threats and other extra-legal measures, like what the FCC is doing now -- they always want to talk about "coercion" by the govt. I've always thought this is a red herring. Current events show why. 1/

Merriam-Webster@merriam-webster.com · 11mo ago

-cease and desist -null and void -aid and abet -free and clear -ways and means Why is law stuff like this always two words? These are called ‘legal doublets’ and we can once again blame the Normans. 🧵⬇️

Aaron Reichlin-Melnick@reichlinmelnick.bsky.social · 11mo ago

They were private businesses adopting censorship in order to avoid government action; similar to here. The Comics Code came after Senate hearings and a moral panic over comic books corrupting youth, so while not technically government imposed, the parallels are there.

@rationalpear.bsky.social · 11mo ago

but those weren’t imposed by the govt. those were industry best practices for the commercial benefit of the whole industry. like the motion picture rating system. or youtube not showing graphic pictures of war. they could but it would be bad business.

Bobby Silverman@robertsilverman.bsky.social · 11mo ago

"Multiple execs felt that Kimmel had not actually said anything over the line, the two sources say, but the threat of Trump administration retaliation loomed." They will never learn that capitulation doesn't work. Never

Asawin Suebsaeng@swin24.bsky.social · 11mo ago

As we’ve reported before at @rollingstone.com, trump and his gang plotted to use the federal government against his enemies in late night tv even before he was reelected. Now…. www.rollingstone.com/tv-movies/tv...

LPE Blog@lpeblog.bsky.social · 11mo ago

"In the era of Trump, censorship... very likely will target the economic infrastructure of speech rather than speech itself. But this does not make it any less a threat to the democratic values that the First Amendment is supposed to protect." A good day to revisit @genevievelakier.bsky.social!

The TikTok Ban and the Limits of the First Amendment

The Supreme Court's unanimous affirmation of the TikTok Ban reveals a dangerous weakness in the First Amendment: its failure to protect against government repression that targets the economic…

lpeproject.org

Jonathan Ladd@jonathanmladd.com · 11mo ago

There’s competition, I know. But threatening to pull the broadcast licenses of the affiliates of an entire “big-3” television network unless they stop their evening talk show host from criticizing the president has to be one of the biggest First Amendment violations in U.S. history.

Daphne Keller@daphnek.bsky.social · 11mo ago

Then think about tech companies’ incentives — and especially AI companies’ incentives — to be pliant putty in the administration’s hands, if that’s what keeps the money flowing.